US President George W. Bush's visit to Beijing on the 30th anniversary of the Shanghai Com-munique inevitably brought up painful memories of Taiwan's past humiliations. The situation in Beijing may be the same as in the past, but people and the world have changed fundamentally.
Thirty years ago, Beijing was valuable as an anti-Soviet factor. Today, the Soviet Union is no more and may be substituted by China as the major strategic challenge to the US in the 21st century. Washington and Taipei are ruled by a new generation of young leaders and Beijing is facing the succession of a fourth generation of leaders. Apart from this, the mainstream trend in global politics is freedom and democracy, and China has become one of a minority of remaining communist countries.
Since 1972, the US has gradually sacrificed the interests of Taiwan in three communiques, hoping for Chinese cooperation in exchange. In the midst of a strengthening economy and military, however, Beijing continues to apply pressure on Taiwan with armed threats and a zero-sum-game attitude, while also maintaining an ambiguous attitude toward the proliferation of nuc-lear weapons and of selling sensitive technologies to countries in the "axis of evil."
In the wake of the wounds inflicted by the Sept. 11 attacks on the US, the importance of last week's visit by Bush is quite different from that of former president Richard Nixon's ice-breaking visit in 1972.
Bush's handling of the Taiwan Strait issue displays the following profound changes:
One, prior to the meeting with Chinese President Jiang Zemin (
Compare this to 1998, when former president Bill Clinton pronounced the "three nos" in Shanghai, drawing a reaction from the US Congress. Washington hurriedly sent Richard Bush to Taiwan to explain for Clinton, but the damage was already done.
Two, there is a new interpretation of "one China" and the three communiques. Even though Bush has reiterated the "one China" stance, he did not bring up "one China" and the three communiques during the joint public press conference with Jiang in Beijing. Instead, he said that the US government's view of Taiwan has remained unchanged for many years, that the US believes in the peaceful resolution of this issue, that no party should make any provocative moves and that the US will continue to support the Taiwan Relations Act.
The repeated pronouncements of this view prior to and during Bush's visit to China warrants further attention by Taiwan.
Three, the Taiwan issue -- which is the most sensitive issue in the US-China relationship -- must be approached with sincerity and open dialog. With the Shanghai Communique in 1972, Nixon used evasive and roundabout ways to lay the groundwork for the gradual evacuation of US troops stationed in Taiwan and the establishment of diplomatic ties with China.
Thirty years later, Bush stated that Taiwan is a good Pacific friend of the US and, in his speech to the Japanese Diet, pointed out that the US will support the Philippines, Thailand, South Korea and Japan, and said in public that the US will remember its commitment to the people of Taiwan.
Bush's goal with last week's trip to China was to obtain Chinese cooperation with the anti-terrorist, human rights and arms-proliferation issues, but the experience of 30 years of contact with China has finally made the US understand that compromises over the Taiwan issue will not solve the differences between the US and China.
The only way to prevent a Taiwan crisis and to solve the nuclear proliferation problem is to make the leaders in Beijing clearly understand the US resolve to defend the Taiwan Strait and conduct anti-terrorist activities and activities against countries in the "axis of evil."
Faced with the changing strategic situation at the crossroads of a new century, Taipei should actively explore ways to respond to this new situation.
Joanne J.L. Chang is a research fellow at the Institute of European and American Studies, Academia Sinica.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has